Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 384 Ill. 180 - Kerner v. Kinsey

Kerner v. Kinsey’s Empirical Analysis

1943

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
December 1991
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently December 1991

3 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

90194319501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Leigh v. American Brake-Beam Co. · Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Central Trust Co. · Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance v. Standard Trust & Savings Bank · Kamfner v. Auburn Park Trust & Savings Bank · State National Bank v. Reilly

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * * These are all cases in which the ownership of the funds on deposit was disclosed and the bank permitted them to be appropriated for the use of the corporate officer, upon no other authority than that of the corporate officer involved. “The point is that in each case cited the actual ownership of the fund was known, and complaint was made by the actual owner, and liability was predicated upon the fact being sufficient to give the bank notice that a corporate officer was without authority getting possession of corporate funds. ****** “While the bank might be liable to the corporation for negligently permitting its officers to deposit corporate funds in the officer’s name, yet this is a claim which can be maintained only by the corporation itself. * * * “ * * * On principle, before a bank can be charged with negligence, it must have knowledge of facts sufficient to put it upon notice, and when it does become liable it is only to’ one who, under the settled doctrine of commercial law, is the legal homer * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.